Added a meta data table - one-to-one relationship approach #81
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
In this PR we're attempting to separate the seqcol meta-data from the seqcol entities, by storing them into a separate table.
Fixes #13
Changes made
SeqColMetadata
entityseqcol_digest
&naming_convention
:one-to-many
relationship. It depends on the possible different shapes that a seqcol can take in the future.Here's the new Java model:
And a sample content of the
seqcol_md
table:Changes to make
Each change of the following can be set in a different issue
source_url
×tamp
Discussion
I'm not sure to what extent this approach can cover all the possible scenarios of seqcol meta-data content, and I think making a
one-to-many
relationship might be efficient in case we had to make all columns of theseqcol_md
table primary keys, which means:digest
but with differentsource identifiers
&digest
andnaming convention
but with differentsource identifier
&digest
,naming convention
andsource identifier
but with differentsource_url
&NOTE: The current
seqcol_md
table have bothseqcol_digest
&naming_convention
as composite primary key, which means that we can't find two seqcol objects with same digest and same naming_convention. Can we get such case ??